CClinicalTrials.gg
Not yet recruitingNCT07455682AUD-DOCUpdated Mar 6, 2026

Auditory Processing in DOC Patients

An observational study in Disorder of Consciousness, Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome and Minimally Conscious State, sponsored by BDH-Klinik Hessisch Oldendorf. Not yet recruiting at 1 site in Germany. Open to participants aged 18 Years to 80 Years. Per ClinicalTrials.gov, last updated 2026-03-06.

Sponsored by BDH-Klinik Hessisch Oldendorf · Observational

Study type
Observational
Model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
42
Ages
18 Years to 80 Years
Sex
All
01

Study summary

This prospective observational study investigates whether electroencephalography (EEG) can improve the differentiation between unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) and minimally conscious state (MCS) in patients with severe acquired brain injury. The study further examines the association between EEG markers of auditory processing and long-term functional outcome at 12 months.

Read the detailed description

Accurate classification of disorders of consciousness remains challenging in neurological early rehabilitation. Behavioral assessment is the clinical standard, yet misclassification persists, particularly in patients with severe motor impairment or fluctuating arousal. Neurophysiological measures may provide complementary information beyond observable behavior.

This study applies event-related potential (ERP) paradigms during bedside EEG recording to assess hierarchical levels of auditory processing in patients with disorders of consciousness in the subacute phase after brain injury. The paradigms are designed to detect neural responses reflecting basic auditory discrimination as well as higher-order cognitive processing.

The primary objective is to determine the highest neurophysiologically detectable level of auditory processing and to examine whether it differs between clinically defined consciousness groups. Secondary objectives include evaluating the relationship between EEG-derived markers and standardized behavioral assessments, as well as assessing the prognostic value of EEG findings for functional outcome one year after admission.

The study aims to clarify the diagnostic and prognostic relevance of EEG-based measures in routine neurorehabilitation settings.

02

Conditions studied

  • Disorder of Consciousness
  • Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome
  • Minimally Conscious State

Keywords

  • Disorders of Consciousness
  • Electroencephalography (EEG)
  • Event-related potential (ERP)
  • Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R)
  • Acquired Brain Injury
  • Critically ill patients
  • Neurological rehabilitation
03

Who can participate

Ages eligible
18 Years to 80 Years
Sexes eligible
All
Accepts healthy volunteers
No
Sampling method
Probability sample

Study population

The study population consists of adult patients (18-80 years) with severe acquired brain injury in the subacute phase who are diagnosed with a disorder of consciousness (Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome or Minimally Conscious State) in a neurological rehabilitation setting.

Inclusion criteria

  • Presence of a disorder of consciousness (Unresponsive Wakefulness Syndrome [UWS] or Minimally Conscious State [MCS]), classified using the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) based on three assessments conducted on at least two separate days
  • Age between 18 and 80 years
  • Written informed consent provided by the patient's legal representative
  • Preserved brainstem auditory evoked potentials (BAEPs) on at least one side

Exclusion criteria

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Ongoing sedation at the time of EEG assessment
  • Current treatment with medications known to significantly affect cortical functional state, including barbiturates, neuroleptics (antipsychotics), antiepileptic drugs, benzodiazepines, or comparable agents
  • Colonization with multidrug-resistant organisms requiring isolation precautions (e.g., 4MRGN)
  • Pregnancy
  • Impaired language comprehension (e.g., insufficient German language proficiency or aphasia)
  • Temporal bone fractures or severe infratentorial brain injury associated with unilateral or bilateral absence of auditory evoked potentials (AEPs)
  • Bilateral hearing impairment or deafness, or presence of a cochlear implant
  • Scalp wounds or conditions preventing placement of an EEG electrode cap
04

Study design

Observational model
Cohort
Time perspective
Prospective
Enrollment
42 participants (estimated)
Patient registry
No

Groups and cohorts

  • UWS patients

    Patients classified as unresponsive wakefulness syndrome (UWS) with the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R)

    Behavioral: Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) · Behavioral: Electroencephalography (EEG)

  • MCS patients

    Patients classified as minimally conscious state (MCS) with the Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R)

    Behavioral: Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) · Behavioral: Electroencephalography (EEG)

Interventions

  • BehavioralComa Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R)

    The Coma Recovery Scale-Revised (CRS-R) is a standardized behavioral assessment instrument used to determine the level of consciousness in patients with severe brain injury. It comprises six subscales evaluating auditory, visual, motor, oromotor/verbal, communication, and arousal functions, with hierarchically structured items to identify the highest level of behavioral responsiveness.

  • BehavioralElectroencephalography (EEG)

    Electroencephalography (EEG) is a non-invasive neurophysiological method used to record spontaneous and stimulus-related electrical brain activity via scalp electrodes. In this study, bedside EEG recordings are performed using structured auditory stimulation paradigms designed to elicit event-related potentials (ERPs). These include hierarchical paradigms assessing different levels of auditory processing, ranging from basic sensory discrimination (e.g., mismatch negativity, MMN) to higher-order cognitive processing (e.g., N400 responses). EEG-derived ERP markers are analyzed to determine the highest detectable level of auditory processing and to evaluate their association with clinical diagnosis and long-term functional outcome.

05

What researchers measure

Primary outcomes

  1. Highest Detectable Hierarchical Level of Auditory Processing

    The primary endpoint is the highest neurophysiologically detectable hierarchical level of auditory processing, operationalized by the presence of significant auditory event-related potential (ERP) effects. For each ERP paradigm, analyses are conducted at the individual patient level to determine whether a statistically significant ERP effect is present within predefined time windows and electrode regions. The highest hierarchy level showing a significant effect defines the individual outcome (ordinal scale: levels 1-4).

    Time frame: week 2-3 after admission to neurological rehabilitation

Secondary outcomes

  1. Association Between Clinical Level of Consciousness and Neurophysiological Cognitive Processing

    Relationship between clinically determined consciousness status (e.g., UWS vs. MCS) and the highest achieved hierarchical level of auditory processing as measured by ERP responses.

    Time frame: week 2-3 after admission to neurological rehabilitation

  2. Prognostic Validity of ERP-Based Hierarchical Processing Level

    Predictive value of the highest achieved hierarchical level of auditory processing for functional outcome at 12 months after admission. Functional status will be assessed using a standardized outcome measure.

    Time frame: 12 months after EEG measurement

06

Study locations

1 site
07

References and documents

Publications

  • Wannez S, Heine L, Thonnard M, Gosseries O, Laureys S; Coma Science Group collaborators. The repetition of behavioral assessments in diagnosis of disorders of consciousness. Ann Neurol. 2017 Jun;81(6):883-889. doi: 10.1002/ana.24962. PubMed 28543735 ↗
  • Young MJ, Bodien YG, Giacino JT, Fins JJ, Truog RD, Hochberg LR, Edlow BL. The neuroethics of disorders of consciousness: a brief history of evolving ideas. Brain. 2021 Dec 16;144(11):3291-3310. doi: 10.1093/brain/awab290. PubMed 34347037 ↗
  • Kotchoubey B. Event-related potential measures of consciousness: two equations with three unknowns. Prog Brain Res. 2005;150:427-44. doi: 10.1016/S0079-6123(05)50030-X. PubMed 16186040 ↗
  • Kondziella D, Bender A, Diserens K, van Erp W, Estraneo A, Formisano R, Laureys S, Naccache L, Ozturk S, Rohaut B, Sitt JD, Stender J, Tiainen M, Rossetti AO, Gosseries O, Chatelle C; EAN Panel on Coma, Disorders of Consciousness. European Academy of Neurology guideline on the diagnosis of coma and other disorders of consciousness. Eur J Neurol. 2020 May;27(5):741-756. doi: 10.1111/ene.14151. Epub 2020 Feb 23. PubMed 32090418 ↗
  • Engemann DA, Raimondo F, King JR, Rohaut B, Louppe G, Faugeras F, Annen J, Cassol H, Gosseries O, Fernandez-Slezak D, Laureys S, Naccache L, Dehaene S, Sitt JD. Robust EEG-based cross-site and cross-protocol classification of states of consciousness. Brain. 2018 Nov 1;141(11):3179-3192. doi: 10.1093/brain/awy251. PubMed 30285102 ↗
  • Cruse D, Chennu S, Chatelle C, Bekinschtein TA, Fernandez-Espejo D, Pickard JD, Laureys S, Owen AM. Bedside detection of awareness in the vegetative state: a cohort study. Lancet. 2011 Dec 17;378(9809):2088-94. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)61224-5. Epub 2011 Nov 9. PubMed 22078855 ↗

Individual participant data

Plan to share: No

08

Registry details

Key details

Study ID
NCT07455682
Lead sponsor
BDH-Klinik Hessisch Oldendorf
Responsible party
Sponsor
First posted
Mar 6, 2026
Start date
Apr 15, 2026 (estimated)
Primary completion
Nov 30, 2027 (estimated)
Completion
Mar 31, 2028 (estimated)
Last update
Mar 6, 2026

Oversight

Data monitoring committee
No
FDA-regulated drug
No
FDA-regulated device
No
View the source record on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗

Not currently enrolling

This study is not yet recruiting, as verified in Mar 2026. You cannot join it, but the record below documents what was studied.

Follow this study

Get an email when the registry record changes — status, dates, results — or when someone posts here.

Sign in to follow

Discussion

Questions and observations about this study, from anyone following it. Not medical advice, and not a channel to the study team — their contact details are on the registry record.

Sign in to join the discussion. Reading takes no account; posting does. You choose a display name, and a pseudonym is the default.

Nothing here yet. If you are running this trial, taking part in it, or weighing whether to, this is the place to say so.

Start the discussion